- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@avron.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 20:20:30 -0700
- To: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
- Cc: http-caching@pa.dec.com
> One question: how does a cache decide if 300 response with an > Alternates header can be returned in reply to a subsequent > request (a more precise way of saying "is cachable")? Is this > > 1. Always > > 2. Only if the new request looks like [fill in the blank] > > 3. Never Always, unless otherwise indicated by a Cache-control or Expires in the 300 response. This is (was?) in the description of 300. > I guess I'd be happier if someone could tell me what a Content-Location > looked like. Just like Location, except with "Content-" in front. I edited the description directly into Jim's copy, since the changes from URI covered many different areas. > It might also be nice if someone could explain how an > origin server decides whether to use opaque negotiation or transparent > negotiation. However, I think from the point of view of caching, I > don't need to know. It would normally be done via server configuration (in practice, on a directory-by-directory basis or using .meta/.multi files). > ... > I would rephrase that as: The variant-ID is used as part of the cache > key only if the Request-URI is not sufficient to determine a specific > entity. (And then only for conditional requests and for replacing > existing cache entries.) Yep. ......Roy
Received on Wednesday, 17 April 1996 03:55:34 UTC